PDA

View Full Version : Dems vote down missle defense funding



bobdina
06-16-2009, 08:54 PM
Committee votes down missile defense increase

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jun 16, 2009 18:41:29 EDT

House Republicans failed Tuesday in an effort to restore funding for missile defense programs.

Despite arguing that the world is less safe as a result of Iran and North Korea trying to get long-range nuclear weapons which could be used to attack U.S. cities, the House Armed Services Committee voted 36-26 against an amendment to spend an additional $1.2 billion on missile defense programs in 2010. The vote restores the $9 billion current budget the administration has proposed cutting.

The votes came as President Barack Obama said North Korea poses a “grave threat” to the world by threatening to develop ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Also, Pentagon officials predict North Korea could, within three years, develop the capability to strike the U.S.

There were a series of missile defense-related votes, all decided by about the same margin, as the armed services committee worked on the 2010 defense authorization bill, HR 2647.

The chief amendment to restore funding, by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., would have undone a proposed cut in missile defense funding. The $1.2 billion would have been taken from environmental cleanup programs.

Franks said he, and the American public, thinks the missile threat to the U.S. is not declining, and that Obama acknowledged that in his remarks at the White House during a meeting with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak.

Debate included discussion about whether the U.S. needs 44 missile interceptors — the goal during the Bush administration — or the 30 interceptors that Pentagon officials now say is sufficient.

bobdina
06-16-2009, 08:57 PM
To me doesn't really make much sense given North Korea's actions lately and Iran trying the same thing. Especially Obama saying on one hand there's a grave threat and on the other tries to cut spending .

Cruelbreed
06-16-2009, 10:17 PM
we need an effective missile defense measure in those regions, I think it's a current and future necessity. But with current technology wouldn't it be a pain in the ass to maintain them? Especially if their stationed in foreign lands?

Stark
06-17-2009, 05:05 AM
To me doesn't really make much sense given North Korea's actions lately and Iran trying the same thing. Especially Obama saying on one hand there's a grave threat and on the other tries to cut spending .

Korea is doing shit – The N. Korean elite know fair well that the only way to stay in power and to enjoy whatever these poor starving bastards can give them is by staying in power and not staring a war with South Korea which never mind how large their forces are they would subsequently loose.

If they ever step over the line and nuke another country they be turned into glass – they know that – we know that so the cards are on the table.
So what if the US has a missile defence system that is 99% accurate – the 1% chance of a missile getting through is enough to keep them a thread – the missile defence system is not the answer at all
We need to if at all drive them to change their system and play ball with the rest of the world that’s a far more effective method to ensure we are not killing each other over the next 20 years.
The Leaders of N.Korea are not mad (as much as the media like to portray them that way) they have very little to bargain with – their country is completely shut of from the rest of the world – the only pressure they can deal is that they may or may not have nuclear weapons, that is THE only thing that keeps themselves in power right now.

bobdina
06-17-2009, 10:21 AM
we need an effective missile defense measure in those regions, I think it's a current and future necessity. But with current technology wouldn't it be a pain in the ass to maintain them? Especially if their stationed in foreign lands?

The interceptors for North Korea are based in Alaska , and on Destroyers based in Japan. Right now there are 30 interceptors stationed in Alaska and are on line.

bobdina
06-17-2009, 11:06 AM
Stark , although I agree with most of your post ,the leaders of North Korea in my mind are not sane. What sane leader would let thousands of their own people starve almost every day just so they can live a little better and invest what little money they have in missiles and nuke technology. Also the Dear Leader firmly believes ( according to some experts ) the North would win a conventional war against South Korea . At least Sadaam had oil money coming in ( and smuggling oil out during the sanctions) If it wasn't for the world food bank and other aid even more would starve to death. I have no doubt that if they thought even for one minute they were on the verge of losing power they would do something unthinkable . This is also a country that has sent commando's to Japan's shores and kidnapped people just for more slave labor more proof of cuckoo cuckoo. Maybe the Dear Leaders son Brilliant Comrade as he is being called is not crazy like dear old dad , one can only hope. They could also launch a non-nuke and reach the west coast of the U.S. so it doesn't have to be nuke strike to start a war.

ghost
06-17-2009, 11:34 AM
Yeah, what else is new....